MashaAllah that's good. I'm planning on studying Qur'anic Arabic and tajweed outside of university as well. Just searching around for teachers at the moment. I think studying both at the same time will be so much easier especially when it comes to learning grammar etc.

(Original post by Inve)
MashaAllah that's good. I'm planning on studying Qur'anic Arabic and tajweed outside of university as well. Just searching around for teachers at the moment. I think studying both at the same time will be so much easier especially when it comes to learning grammar etc.

Yeah deffo do that.
Your grammar will also help with reading the Quran too. You'll pick up little mistakes you make easily.

(Original post by Inve)
MashaAllah that's good. I'm planning on studying Qur'anic Arabic and tajweed outside of university as well. Just searching around for teachers at the moment. I think studying both at the same time will be so much easier especially when it comes to learning grammar etc.

MashaAllah.

You'll also notice the difference between how uni's teach arabic and how Islamic institutes/teachers teach it.

(Original post by ash92:))
That is certainly not a basis of tafseer. We don't pick and choose the interpretation of ahkaam from the Quran based on whims. To acknowledge that the Quran says something whilst not doing it is one thing, but to become influenced by things like what sits well with you and those around you in what you conclude of the Quran's instruction is a whole other matter.

This is what the Christians did and it eventually lead to a significant number of new atheists. As Muslims, we don't let 'what other people think' justify the distortion and twisting of Quranic injections. Rather, we study the Quran in order to attain a wholesome understanding of the issue at hand. It is very important not to mix up our priorities. We seek reward and acceptance from Allah ta'ala, no from those of His creation who deny His rights and favours upon them.

Im confused now. I have been told by people with good knowledge that those verses only apply to Muhammads wars with the pagans when he was growing Islam and being attacked. It makes sense to me because we cant still be at war with disbelievers. you are saying that you dont care if it makes Islam look violent because thats what you think the Quran says. I dont think I agree those verses can still be used today.

(Original post by guided1)
Im confused now. I have been told by people with good knowledge that those verses only apply to Muhammads wars with the pagans when he was growing Islam and being attacked. It makes sense to me because we cant still be at war with disbelievers. you are saying that you dont care if it makes Islam look violent because thats what you think the Quran says. I dont think I agree those verses can still be used today.

With Islam, it is with established evidence that the scholars conclude whether or not a ruling was limited for a time or used as an exception. We cannot merely dismiss portions of the Quran because it was revealed over a thousand years ago. As for the ayaat regarding war: war occurs in various places around the world and muslims must abide by the laws of Islam if they are involved in war. For example, the ayah stating "expel them from where they expelled you" clearly states a principle of retaliation without transgression and oppression. The mention of killing disbelievers is due to circumstantial necessity - the case at the time of revelation has been summarised earlier; muslims were being killed, tortured, assaulted, boycotted and made to flee their homes and business for fear of their safety. After leaving their homes, businesses, properties, family and friends for emigration to Madinah, they were still pursued by the disbelievers of Makkah...and so on and so forth.

It goes without mentioning that misusing the injuctions of the Quran for our own whims is outright going against the word of Allah, hence IS and their ilk lack knowledge and correct Islamic practice. But this does not mean that we disregard an ayah as outdated because of actions that claim to go by it.

As for the matter of whether the ayaat in question are specific only to those wars at the time or not, this is something that the scholars' explanations should be consulted about.

(Original post by guided1)
Im confused now. I have been told by people with good knowledge that those verses only apply to Muhammads wars with the pagans when he was growing Islam and being attacked. It makes sense to me because we cant still be at war with disbelievers. you are saying that you dont care if it makes Islam look violent because thats what you think the Quran says. I dont think I agree those verses can still be used today.

Everything changes with culture is that what your trying to say.
And us doing nothing is actually worse since parts of the Ummah are suffering and we're just chilling. We should be doing way more than we are.
I think you have to look at the context of verse in the Qu'raan. What do you think? But follow the Qu'raan at the same time.
Don't want to say anything more as we're being moderated thanks to me.

(Original post by ash92:))
With Islam, it is with established evidence that the scholars conclude whether or not a ruling was limited for a time or used as an exception. We cannot merely dismiss portions of the Quran because it was revealed over a thousand years ago. As for the ayaat regarding war: war occurs in various places around the world and muslims must abide by the laws of Islam if they are involved in war. For example, the ayah stating "expel them from where they expelled you" clearly states a principle of retaliation without transgression and oppression. The mention of killing disbelievers is due to circumstantial necessity - the case at the time of revelation has been summarised earlier; muslims were being killed, tortured, assaulted, boycotted and made to flee their homes and business for fear of their safety. After leaving their homes, businesses, properties, family and friends for emigration to Madinah, they were still pursued by the disbelievers of Makkah...and so on and so forth.

It goes without mentioning that misusing the injuctions of the Quran for our own whims is outright going against the word of Allah, hence IS and their ilk lack knowledge and correct Islamic practice. But this does not mean that we disregard an ayah as outdated because of actions that claim to go by it.

As for the matter of whether the ayaat in question are specific only to those wars at the time or not, this is something that the scholars' explanations should be consulted about.

(Original post by ash92:))
With Islam, it is with established evidence that the scholars conclude whether or not a ruling was limited for a time or used as an exception. We cannot merely dismiss portions of the Quran because it was revealed over a thousand years ago. As for the ayaat regarding war: war occurs in various places around the world and muslims must abide by the laws of Islam if they are involved in war. For example, the ayah stating "expel them from where they expelled you" clearly states a principle of retaliation without transgression and oppression. The mention of killing disbelievers is due to circumstantial necessity - the case at the time of revelation has been summarised earlier; muslims were being killed, tortured, assaulted, boycotted and made to flee their homes and business for fear of their safety. After leaving their homes, businesses, properties, family and friends for emigration to Madinah, they were still pursued by the disbelievers of Makkah...and so on and so forth.

It goes without mentioning that misusing the injuctions of the Quran for our own whims is outright going against the word of Allah, hence IS and their ilk lack knowledge and correct Islamic practice. But this does not mean that we disregard an ayah as outdated because of actions that claim to go by it.

As for the matter of whether the ayaat in question are specific only to those wars at the time or not, this is something that the scholars' explanations should be consulted about.

Thanks. I think I understand. Those verses only apply when the same sort of things are happening that happened to Muhammad pbuh. It is a bit confusing when I read different things from different scholars and they say diffent things. Who is your favourite scholar?

SubhanAllah.
Not many of us realise how hurting others and harming someone else not only angers Allah swt but eats away at any good deeds you think you are doing.
And the prophet pbuh described as bankrupt those who come with prayer, fast and all manner of good deeds and come with sins that hurt others.

(Original post by guided1)
Thanks. I think I understand. Those verses only apply when the same sort of things are happening that happened to Muhammad pbuh. It is a bit confusing when I read different things from different scholars and they say diffent things. Who is your favourite scholar?

Barakallahu feek.

When relying upon a scholar, in our capacity as laypeople, we should try to see if they go by the Quran and Ahaadeeth, if their conclusions are comparable or at least consider those of past scholars who are known for their piety and knowledge, whether they seek to distort the Quran in the guise of modernism/liberalism/westernisation of religious matters such that the usool (principles) of the science (eg fiqh - the Islamic field that relates to thoroughly understanding Islamic sources and then deriving rulings from them) are totally disregarded.

Many people seek Fatwas from islamqa.info, daruliftaa.com, Sh Haitham al-Haddad, and so on - these are people/institutions that are known to be sound in fiqh. There are also others, but the above have been mentioned as examples.